[PDF] compact workweek which may be compressed, for example

Alternative Work Schedule - Option Examples

of hours to be worked (for 37-1/2 hour employee): 7:00 a m to 3:00 p m (½ hr lunch) or 3:30 

Examples of Different Flexible Work Arrangements

ed hours within a fixed schedule: Employees establish starting and ending times that differ from 

ALTERNATIVE WORK SCHEDULE - The University of Scranton

ible work schedules to University employees The AWS committee EXAMPLES OF FLEX/AWS HOURS ▫ Individualized traditional 35-40 hour work weeks are: ▫ 4/8 75 Four 

COMPRESSED WORKING TIME

Cité 33 fois — Examples of seasonal shift schedules from Italy 33 Table 2 8 : Two different shift schedules for a compressed working week 17 to 35 hours in the metal industry) the introduction of 9-hour shifts means 4

WORKING TIME ARRANGEMENTS - ILO

s of compressed working week The very first ILO Convention, adopted in 1919, limited hours of work and referred to as work schedules) that can balance workers' needs with the enterprise's re-

compact workweek which may be compressed, for example

1974 · Cité 24 fois — 10-hour days; and (2) the flexible workweek in which the employee has latitude in scheduling A five-day, 40-hour schedule was followed by 35 people but they were not in the San 

Flexible and Compressed Workweek Schedules - ResearchGate

s of common alternative work schedules include flexible work- ing hours (flextime), compressed 

pdf Alternative Work Schedule - Option Examples

Week 1 – work 8 hours Thursday Friday Monday Tuesday Wednesday (equals 40 hours 2 50 hours of which are comp time) Week 2 – work 8-3/4 hours Thursday Friday Tuesday Wednesday (off Monday) which equals 35 hours and use 2 50 hours of comp time from week 1 Nine day payroll period (for 40-hour employee – not available to overtime

[PDF] 36 hour weekly fast

[PDF] 36 hour work week schedule

[PDF] 38100 grenoble france

[PDF] 3d coordinates from 2d images python

[PDF] 3d face reconstruction github

[PDF] 3d from 2d images deep learning

[PDF] 3d heatmap python seaborn

[PDF] 3d histogram python seaborn

[PDF] 3d model images free

[PDF] 3d reconstruction from multiple images software

[PDF] 3d reconstruction from single image

[PDF] 3d reconstruction from video github

[PDF] 3d shape vocabulary words

[PDF] 4 impasse gomboust 75001 paris 1er arrondissement

[PDF] 4 stages of language development pdf

ED 097 536

AUTHOR

TITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

PUB DATE

NOTE

AVAILABLE FROM

EDRS PRICE

DESCRIPTORSDOCUMENT RESUME

CE 002 307

Glickman, Albert S.; Brown, Zenia H.

Changing Schedules of Work; Patterns and

Implications.

American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences, Silver Spring, Md.; Upjohn (N.E.) Inst. for

Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Mich.

Manpower Administration (DOL), Washington, D.C.

Jun 74

108p.
The W. E. Upjohn Institute For Employment Research,

300 South Westnedge Avenue, Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007

($2.50)

MF-$0.75 HC-$5.40 PLUS POSTAGE

Change Strategies; Changing Attitudes; *Economic

Research; Employment Patterns; Employment Trends;

*Flexible Schedules; Flexible Scheduling; Futures (of

Society); Innovation; *Leisure Time; Manpower

Utilization; Research Needs; Social Change; Social

Problems; Time Blocks; Trend Analysis; Work

Attitudes; *Working Hours

ABSTRACT

Implications of innovative experiments with changes in the standard 40-hour workweek are dealt with in the study, which is a shorter version of a comprehensive report on changing work schedules prepared by the American Institute for Research. Varying patterns of two general types of workweeks are presented:(1) the compact workweek which may be compressed, for example, into four

10-hour days; and (2) the flexible workweek in which the employee has

latitude in scheduling work time to meet the standard weekly requirement. Information is given about various administrative experiments in work scheduling. Given primary attention are the various kinds and degrees of impact that alternative schedules of work can have on human performance, social processes and organization, and the quality of life. Such alternatives may require that social-political systems develop means for greater control of free-time activities to ensure equity. Particular attention is given to the social and psychological adjustments required as a result of the trend discerned by the researchers, who offer guidance to those involved in anticipating and preparing for the foreseen changes. (Author/AJ) reN anN-c-

U.S. OEPANTMENT OF MALIKOEDUCATION WELFARE

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATIONC=ITHIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCZD EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM

THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN

ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS

STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE

SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY

0

0CHANGING SCHEDULES OF WORK

Patterns and Implications

By

Albert S. Glickman

Deputy Director

and

Zen$a H. Brown

Senior Research Associate

Washington Office

American Institutes jbr Research

June 1974

N) The W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research

77777,M1

BE,SLEOEI

AVAILABLE,

THE W. E. UPJOHN INSTITUTE

FOR EMPLOYMENT RESEARCH

THE INSTITUTE, a nonprofit research organization, was established On July 1, 1945. It is an activity of the W. E. Upjohn Unemployment Trustee Corporation, which was formed in 1932 to administer t fund set aside by the late Dr. W. E. Upjohn for the purpose of carrying on "research into the causes and effects of unemployment and measures for the alleviation of unemployment."

Offices

300 South Westnedge Ave.

1101 Seventeenth St., N.W.

Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007

Washington, D.C. 20036

This publication is for sale by the Kalamazoo office at

52.50 per copy. For quantity orders of this publication or

any combination of Institute publications, price reductions arcasfollows:10-25 copies.10 percent; 26-50,15;

51-100, 20; over 100, 25.

ii

IESLCOPY AVAILABLE

The Board of Trustees

of the

W. E. Upjohn Unemployment Trustee Corporation.

Harry E. Turbeville,

Chairman

E. Gifford Upjohn, M.D.,

Vice Chairman

Donald

S. Gilmore,Vice Chairman

D. Gordon Knapp,Secretary-Treasurer

Mrs. Genevieve U. Gilmore

Charles C. Gibbons

Preston S. Parish

Mrs. Ray T. Parfet, Jr.

James H. Duncan

Staff of the Institute

Samuel V. Bennett

Katherine H. Ford

Rodger S. Lawson

A. Harvey Belitsky

Saul J. Blaustein

Sidney A. Fine

Ann M. HoltSamuel V. Bennett

Director

Ben S. StephattskY

.1ssociate

Director

Kalamazoo Oi flee

Eugene C. NleKean

Jack R. Woods

E. Earl Wright

Washington Office

Maret F. flu tchinson

Paul J. Mackin

Niel-rill G. Murray

Harold L. Sheppard

Ben S. Stephansky

Ill

FOREWORD

The W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research is pleased to publish this study on flexible work schedules, a subject of growing practical interest in both the United States and Europe. Its broader context is the continuing search for new "social inventions" to improve the quality of work life. The search in recent years has produced an agenda dealing with the human factors in industrial organization; those, if left unattended, impair the workers' pro- ductive capacity. Job redesign, workers' sabbaticals, nidcareer counseling and retraining, and continuing education are among the more prominent innova tions of a growing agenda addressed to the human needs of the labor force. The flexible work schedule is a recent item added to this agenda. This publication is the result of collaboration between the Upjohn Institute and the American Institutes for Research in preparing a design during 1973
for an assessment of work schedules. Both organizations brought to the col- laboration the fruits of several years' research and publication. Among these was an unusually comprehensive report on flexible work schedules prepared by the American Institutes for Research for the U.S. Department of

Labor's

Manpower Administration. The Upjohn Institute believes that the report merits publication because, notwithstanding expanding experimentation with a variety of flexible work schedules, and notwithstanding numerous magazine and newspaper reports and individual reports, there has not appeared in the United States a publication that presents the subject in its full scope. This study admirably opens a comprehensive field of vision in a promising area of manpower experimentation embracing worker. family, and community needs with productive results for industry and commerce. Dr. Albert S. Glickman, Deputy Director of the Washington office of the American Institutes for Research, and Director of the Organizational Behavior Research Group, was principal investigator in this study. Miss Zenia H.

Brown,

Senior Research Associate, was a close collaborator. Great appreciation is due Mrs. Katherine H. Ford of the Upjohn Institute staff who reduced a longer study and readably preserved its essential integrity and continuity.

Washington, D.C.

May 1974

ivBen S. Stephansky

Associate Director

PREFACE

This report was originally

preparedfor the Manpower Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, under research and developmentcontract No.

80-11-72-11 with the American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral

Sciences. Since contractors conducting research and development contracts under government sponsorship are encouraged toexpress their own judgment freely, this report does not represent the official opinionor policy of the Department of Labor. Nor does this report represent the views of the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. The authors arc solely responsi- ble for its contents. We are gratetti! to tit? Manpower Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor for the support' of this study under Title I of the Matipowei

Devel-

opment and Training Act, and to Dr. Richard P. Shore. who servedas the agency's project monitor. Several members of the Washington office staff of the American Institutes for Research lent notable assistance to this project. Dr. Ronald

P. Carver,

Senior Research Scientist, made helpful inputs in the early part of the project. Mrs. Doris G. Donohue, Administrative Associate, carried the major burden of manuscript preparation. We thank the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research for under- taking to give wider dissemination to this work by this publication at the initiative of its Associate Director, Dr. Ben S. Stephansky, and for the ed itorial contribution of Mrs. Katherine H. Ford.

Albert S. Glickman

and Zenia H. Brown

Washington, D.C.

May 19747-7,777 ..4,771,Ma

THE AUTHORS

Albert S. Glickman is Deputy Director of the Washington office of the Amer- ican Institutes for Research and Director of AIR's Organizational Behavior Research Group. (Ile had been an AIR project director 1952-1955, and he returned to AIR in 1967.) Ile was Chief of the Personnel Research Staff of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (1962-1967) and Director of (le Psycho- logical Research Department of the U.S. Naval Personnel Research.Activity in Washington, D.C. (1955-1962). Earlier, he taught at the Georgia Institute of "technology (1947-1952). In 1952 he received his Ph.D. degree in indus- trialorganifational psychology from The Ohio State University, from which he also holds M.A. and B.A. degrees. Dr. Glickman is the senior author of Top Management DePelopment and Successhm with Clifford P. Hahn. Edwin A. Fleishman, and Brent Baxter; he is coauthor of

Action: A Program PrChange inPolice

Co»ununit licharior Patterns

with Terry Eisenberg and Robert H. Fosen, and of Police Camen:OmstructingCareer Paths lug Tomorrow ti Police Force with David Sheppard. In addition to these books, he has authored or co- authored more than 50 professional journal articles and technical reports in management. organization. and personnel areas. For several years lie has been a consulting editor of the

Journal ofApplied Psyhologv. He is a fellow of

the American Psychological Association in the Division of Industrial and Or- ganizational Psychology and the Division of Evaluation and Measurement, a fellow of the International Association of Applied Psychology, and a member of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. Zenia II. Brown graduated from Elmira College in 1963. Since then she has assisted with a variety of projects conducted by the American Institutes for Research. In addition to the project reported here, in which she served as Senior Research Associate. her research has included work on skills invento- ries. job evaluation. automobile and industrial safety. career motivation and occupational socialization. and educational evaluation. She has coauthored several technical reports in these research areas. Miss Brown is a member of the International Sociological Association, Research Committee for Leisure and Culture. and of the Society for Human- istic Management. vi

CONTENTS

Foreword

Preface

Summaryiv

v 1 I.

Introduction5

Background

5

Objectives

7 II.

Labor-Leisure Trends

Concepts and Value of Free Time

Options in Using Free Time

Flexibility

Declining Work Time; Increasing Free Time

Free-Time Potential Created by Productivity Gains

Generalizations About Group Choices

Overtime Alongside Reduction in Workhours

Realistic ExpectationII

II 12 12 14 14 15 15 III.

Experiences With New Patterns of Work Tim-17

Arrangements of Working Time

Problems Associated With Compact Workweeks

Experiential Data

Case Studies

Flexi-Time

Problems To Be Solved

Case History of Messerschmidt-Bolkow-Blohm

Summary17

19 21
25
34
36
37
39
IV.

Toward a General Perspective43

A Glimpse Ahead

43

Accelerating Rat. of Change45

(continued) vii

Contents (Continued)

V. Individual Choice and Adjustment

47

Personal Preferences

47

The Individual's Changing Values of Work

and Leisure 50

Constraints Upon Individual Choice

and Organizational Change

New Individual Adjtfstment Patterns

S9 VI.

Roles of Business, Labor, Government,

and Social Institutions 61
Shared and Conflicting Plans, Purposes, and Values .61

Changing Populations and Motivations

63

New Pattervc in Roles and Relationships

of Social Institutions 65

Influences of Flexible Work Time

on the Labor Market 70

VII, Research Needed in Support of Future Policy

and Planning 75

Necessary Coordination of Plans and Policies

at Various Levels 75

Research Needs

83

Works Cited

97
viii

SUMMARY

In years past, work schedules

were dominant in determining the life styles of individuals and how they used their time off the job. This isno longer the case for many people. In some occupations education and retirement, holi- days and vacations, and Saturdays and Sundays addup to as much time or more time than time on the job. Business and industry in both the United States and Europe have been experimenting with changesin work si:liedules. But the luxury of greater flexibility in worktime has created problems in theuse of free time.

The emphasis in this report is

upon issues, alternatives, and interactions in- volved in dealing with the problems of scheduling worktime and utilizing free tin,I beneficially. The report deals with the individualand organizational be-

havior side of the issues more than the economic side.Its orientation is frank-ly speculative, and hopefully provocative.

After a review of work-time and nonwork-time activity trends, we discuss

recent experience with compact workweeks in the United States andwith"flexitime," which was initiated in Western Europe. Thenwe address theflexibility issue itself.

In certain types of work a worker must be available at a specific place at a specific time for a specific length of time. The structuralcharacteristics of time, space, place, pace, equipment, laws, contracts, andorganization of work upon which he is dependent often provide little orno room for changes in an

individual's behavior. In certain other settings, the individualis "his own toolkit," and he can largely determine howto budget his own time and effort.

And the number of jobs where this type of freedom is possibleis increasing.

Flexibility can be programmed ,,to rigid job schedules, forexample, by mak-ing better use of available computerprograms togivethe individual morechoice in the days and hours he works. Such sophisticatedtools can be usedto assure that the job gets done, whilemore nearly optimizing the benefits

for all. Mr. Anthony Benn, who has servedas Minister of Technology in Great Britain, has voiced the potential and general goal thusly:"The evolution of modern management science will ultimately allowevery single individual to be taken into full account in the evolution of social planning."

We can foresee an Increasing

demandfor flexibility in working time. Past

demands have usually focused upon decreasing the number ofhours spent inworking. But withdays offapproaching and exceedingworkdays,there has

been a diversion of pressure toward greater

Although most work-

ers still show a preference for more income over more leisure, as more and more people exceed the minimum acceptable standards for quality of life. there may be more striving for individual fulfillment in attractive ways that require more free titne than income. If indeed we can expect to see more demand for flexibility and more pos sibilities for achieving flexibility, what can we expect in the way of problems? Surely, the increased flexibility in time alloc...tion to work and nonwork ac- tivities means increased complexity. There will be new requirements for maaagement in business. government, an'; education. There will be new re- quirements for organizations. processes, and structures. There will be new re- quirements frq auditing and evaluation procedures. These requirements must be met with new policies. And these policies must assure that the quality of lift. can be raised and ,,:tPttsively shared. We shall need policies to deal with the conflicting roles, purposes. and values Of trade unions and employers, for example. Roth parties arc likely to agree that the patterns of working time should be organized so that the in- dividual worker ultimately derives the maxinutm possible benefits. However, there are disagreements as to what constitutes a benefit and how it is to be achieved. A case in point is the fourday workweek with 10 hours per day. Labor laws and contracts regarding overtime payment based upon the eight- hour day become an issue when the alternative is presented. In trying to de- termine whether increased flexibility of work scheduling constitutes a long- term benefit or liability for the individual worker. we wed to consider the total quality of life that accrues from the tradeoffs among various nonwork and work options. Furthermore, we need tb develop criteria for measuring the quality of life. More employees than ever before are better educated and are expecting to reach more personally fulfilling. higher level goals through their work and their leisure. More employees than ever before want direct personal involve- ment in determining when, where, and how they will work and in assessing values and risks involved in their exercise of choice. These changing attitudes toward work can have a tremendous effect upou life styles. When job routines become fully automated. we suggest the posSibility of individuals vying to become workers. not because they need more money, but because they have the chance to do stimulating things that are not pre- programmed. The leisure class with free time on its hands may then be at the lower end of the social scale.

77-77''

By the end of the century, the population

curve for blue-collar workers may follow the same path as that for agricultural workers. The motives of dif- ferent working groupsmay also be expected to change in different ways.

When basic needs are fulfilled. motives change.

If populations and motivations are changing. then institutions must also change. For them to be sluggish inresponse to demands, is to risk their cred- ibility and viability. Indeed,our institutions must adopt policies which have self-renewing flexibility built into them so as to be able to react sensitively to change. To legislate flexibility is difficult. Yet it is possible ft government or any organization to take the lead in supporting the necessary research for establishing and changing policies. Perhaps nations will create ministries of "leisure and life quality" to complement thepresent ministries of labor so that clearer purpose and better coordination ofactivities and resources to such ends as -lifetime learning" can be achieved.

In the present instance. government

can support an investigation of the actual and predicted effects of greater flexibility in workingtime. The pos- sible role of new patterns of working time in stabilizingthe labor market is a case in point. What can we expect? For many employers,a large dividend may accrue. A greater range of production, scheduling, work programming, and placement adjustments might contribute to less layoffs, slowdowns, ab- senteeism. and work stoppages. G;eater flexibility withinand between organi- z.ationA could open up the job market to morewomen, older individuals, and the physically and socially handicapped. Contraryto conventional wisdom. we might ask whether stability in the labor market can be fostered through allowing more people to work for more than one employer. It is not unreasonable to expect that increasing regulation of productive enterprise and work activity will be accompanied by comparable increases in control of nonwork or leisure-time activities. The complexitiesinvolved in coordinating the schedules of factories, stores,churches, schools, public ser- vices, and so forth must be dealt with. And theopportunities provided to learn how to use free time more satisfactorilymust keep pace. If individuals are to take advantage of these opportunities, mass transportation schedules will need to be changed. Increasing flexibility of working time carries with it complexities whichquotesdbs_dbs17.pdfusesText_23